christian cosmopolitanism, part II -cosmos and community

more thoughts about christian cosmopolitanism:

i think that the ideal of 'cosmopolitanism' is sometimes seen as standing in opposition to a way of thinking that views tradition as valuable, even essential, to good living and good thinking. similarly, cosmopolitanism is sometimes seen as an ethos of 'bland universalism' in contrast to an outlook which values the 'richness of particularity.' cosmopolitanism might be associated with a kind of skepticism or rationalism. worse still, the cosmopolitan individual might be seen as rootless and detached from any concrete community: a lover of humanity who never loves any particular human being.

for those who take such a view of cosmopolitanism, the notion of a 'christian cosmopolitanism' is likely to seem an oxymoron: to be christian is already to be committed to a particular tradition, a particular set of beliefs, a particular way of life, and such commitment is antithetical to the core sensibility and outlook of a universalistic (and, perhaps, skeptical) cosmopolitanism.

it is not necessary, however, for us to think of cosmopolitanism this way. rather than taking skepticism about tradition or rootlessness as the core of cosmopolitanism, we can understand its core to be a commitment to the idea that what is most important about a person cannot be captured by reference to her particular national or cultural situation. what is deepest and most important in ourselves and in other human beings -and what ought to govern how we relate to ourselves and to others- is not something limited to our national or cultural heritage. moreover, our loyalties based on our membership in a particular nation or group are subservient to our loyalities based on things common to all humanity. on this way of thinking, it makes sense to speak of christian cosmopolitanism, because it is a specifically christian outlook which leads to cosmopolitan conclusions about what is most important in a human beings and about the limits of our local loyalties.

this is not to say that the picture of cosmopolitanism sketched earlier has no basis in the history of cosmopolitan thinking, or to deny that some forms of cosmopolitanism have failed to appreciate the importance of tradition and particularity. rather, i think that christian cosmopolitanism may be valuable precisely because it is able to correct some of the mistakes of other forms of cosmopolitanism. a christian cosmopolitanism, for example, is able to delight in the particularities of a culture -because they reflect divine creativity and beauty in their own unique way- while at the same time resisting the temptation to idolatry or sentimentality -because no culture is god and every culture is tainted by sin.

likewise, a christian cosmopolitanism will critize 'rootless individualism' as inconsistent with the command to love, the call to live as part of the body of christ, and the fact that we were created to live in real community with one another. thus, a christian cosmopolitanism will have no problems stressing the importance of local communities for human flourishing. and yet, a christian cosmopolitanism will also understand that the very significance of a local christian community depends on the fact that they are part of something more important and more mysterious than themselves -the kingdom of god. because the kingdom of god is not limited by cultural or national boundaries, our communities ought never to give in to the 'us vs. them' mentality which is the hallmark of so much human thinking.